Remote mental health care interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: An umbrella review

Mitigating the COVID-19 related disruptions in mental health care services is crucial in a time of increased mental health disorders. Numerous reviews have been conducted on the process of implementing technology-based mental health care during the pandemic. The research question of this umbrella review was to examine what the impact of COVID-19 was on access and delivery of mental health services and how mental health services have changed during the pandemic. A systematic search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses was conducted up to August 12, 2022, and 38 systematic reviews were identified. Main disruptions during COVID-19 were reduced access to outpatient mental health care and reduced admissions and earlier discharge from inpatient care. In response, synchronous telemental health tools such as videoconferencing were used to provide remote care similar to pre-COVID care, and to a lesser extent asynchronous virtual mental health tools such as apps. Implementation of synchronous tools were facilitated by time-efficiency and flexibility during the pandemic but there was a lack of accessibility for specific vulnerable populations. Main barriers among practitioners and patients to use digital mental health tools were poor technological literacy, particularly when preexisting inequalities existed, and beliefs about reduced therapeutic alliance particularly in case of severe mental disorders. Absence of organizational support for technological implementation of digital mental health interventions due to inadequate IT infrastructure, lack of funding, as well as lack of privacy and safety, challenged implementation during COVID-19. Reviews were of low to moderate quality, covered heterogeneously designed primary studies and lacked findings of implementation in low- and middle-income countries. These gaps in the evidence were particularly prevalent in studies conducted early in the pandemic. This umbrella review shows that during the COVID-19 pandemic, practitioners and mental health care institutions mainly used synchronous telemental health tools, and to a lesser degree asynchronous tools to enable continued access to mental health care for patients. Numerous barriers to these tools were identified, and call for further improvements. In addition, more high quality research into comparative effectiveness and working mechanisms may improve scalability of mental health care in general and in future infectious disease outbreaks.

Which psychotherapy is effective in panic disorder? Findings and reflections from a systematic network meta-analysis

Introduction

Panic disorder is among the most prevalent anxiety diseases. Although psychotherapy is recommended as first-line treatment for panic disorder, little is known about the relative efficacy of different types of psychotherapies.

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of different types of psychotherapies for adults suffering from panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia.

Methods

We are conducting a systematic network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining panic disorder. A comprehensive search was performed to identify relevant studies. The primary efficacy outcome is anxiety symptoms at study endpoint. The primary acceptability outcome is all-cause trial discontinuation at endpoint. Pairwise and network meta-analysis will be conducted. We are considering any kind of psychotherapy delivered by any therapist, as long as they were trained to deliver the therapy, or as self-help.

Results

To date we have identified 126 panic disorder and agoraphobia trials. The publication time span ranges from 1968 to 2020. We are now extracting data to provide an overview of the included study characteristics. The statistical analysis will be conducted between December 2020 and January 2021, and its results presented for the first time at the forthcoming 2021 EPA congress.

Conclusions

126 trials on psychotherapy for panic disorders in adults are available. Because of this huge body of knowledge, it is important that the results of these studies are summarized using network meta-analytic techniques. The findings of this study will guide future research as knowledge gaps will be easily identified. Moreover, policymakers will have the opportunity to use this summarized knowledge to inform evidence-based decision making.

Disclosure

No significant relationships.

Mental health and psychosocial support in humanitarian settings: a public mental health perspective

AIMS

To discuss the potential usefulness of a public health approach for 'mental health and psychosocial support' (MHPSS) interventions in humanitarian settings.

METHODS

Building on public mental health terminology in accordance with recent literature on this topic and considering existing international consensus guidelines on MHPSS interventions in humanitarian settings, this paper reflects on the relevance of the language of promotion and prevention for supporting the rationale, design and evaluation of interventions, with a particular focus on populations affected by disasters and conflicts in low- and middle-income countries.

RESULTS

A public mental health approach and associated terminology can form a useful framework in the design and evaluation of MHPSS interventions, and may contribute to reducing a divisive split between 'mental health' and 'psychosocial' practice in the humanitarian field. Many of the most commonly implemented MHPSS interventions in humanitarian settings can be described in terms of promotion and prevention terminology.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a common terminology across health, protection, education, nutrition and other relevant sectors providing humanitarian interventions has the potential to allow for integration of MHPSS activities in one overall framework, with diverse humanitarian practitioners working to achieve a common goal.

Drug dose as mediator of treatment effect in antidepressant drug trials: the case of fluoxetine

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed at investigating whether dose is a mediator of treatment effect in fluoxetine-randomized trials. Specifically, we investigated whether dose was higher in trials in which the aim was to demonstrate fluoxetine efficacy in comparison with older antidepressants and lower in trials in which the aim was to demonstrate a new drug's efficacy against fluoxetine.

METHOD

We applied the model developed by Baron and Kenny to investigate the mediational role of drug dose on treatment effect. We included all randomized controlled trials comparing fluoxetine with other antidepressants as monotherapy in the acute-phase treatment of unipolar major depression.

RESULTS

A total of 173 studies were included. In 76 comparisons (44%), fluoxetine was the experimental antidepressant. A metaregression analysis indicated that after adjusting for possible confounders, studies where fluoxetine was the experimental agent were associated with a significant advantage for fluoxetine. However, the Baron and Kenny model revealed no mediational role of drug dose in influencing treatment effect.

CONCLUSION

The outcome of fluoxetine-randomized trials changed according to whether this drug was used as a new compound or as a reference. This finding cannot be attributed to antidepressants dose, as dose failed to emerge as mediator of treatment effect in the Baron and Kenny approach.

Pragmatic design in randomized controlled trials

At more than 10 years after the paper by Hotopf and colleagues regarding pragmatic trials in psychiatry, the field has evolved and is evolving further. There have been many developments in our understanding of what pragmatism really means, and excellent examples of truly pragmatic trials in psychiatry are currently available. Funders have helped encourage more emphasis on the need for such studies, but 'local' and trans-national regulations could help more. Consumers of the evidence should have a greater voice in generating the research agenda and, as this happens, the questions generated are more likely to be answered by a pragmatic approach to trials.